PDA

View Full Version : NFL owners may end tuck rule, amend replays


Galax Steeler
03-17-2013, 09:03 AM
By Gerry Dulac / Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

PHOENIX -- The tuck rule, the once-obscure-but-much-debated regulation that helped the New England Patriots go to the Super Bowl in 2001, could disappear.

Instant replay, which already interrupts the game more times than the Steelers would care to see, could be amended so that a coach without a challenge could still manage to have a play reviewed.

And defenses probably will be glad to know that running backs such as Adrian Peterson soon may be punished for leading with the crown of their helmet, instead of the other way around.

Those are some of the several rule proposals that could be adopted this week when the National Football League owners convene for their annual meeting, which begins today.

The tuck rule, though, probably will draw the most attention. It is one of six proposed rule changes from the league's competition committee that may be abandoned.

"What is happening is a great majority of these plays are appropriately called fumbles," Atlanta Falcons president Rich McKay, chairman of the competition committee, said on a conference call. "Then officials go into replay and look at it, and under the rule if the tuck had not been completed [the call] has to be reversed. They think they can call it and can understand when a passer has lost control of the ball, so we felt more comfortable proposing the rule."

The tuck rule became one of the most infamous in the league in 2001 when Patriots quarterback Tom Brady appeared to lose a fumble late in an AFC playoff game against the Oakland Raiders. The call was reversed under the tuck rule, and the Patriots went on to beat the Raiders and advance to the AFC Championship game against the Steelers at Heinz Field.

Last season, Steelers quarterback Ben Roethlisberger appeared to be the benefactor of the tuck rule when his throwing arm was hit by New York Giants defensive end Osi Umenyiora, causing a fumble. Linebacker Michael Boley returned the fumble for a touchdown.

Roethlisberger's arm appeared to be going forward, but replay challenge upheld the call on the field and the touchdown return stood.

"I think, basically, we will at least potentially make it a little easier to officiate in terms of the action of the quarterback bringing the ball back to his body is no longer considered part of the pass," Steelers president Art Rooney II said. "I guess the bottom line is that it will be easier for a quarterback to fumble the ball than the other result."

The league also will look at a proposal that allows a team that has no more video challenges to still have the play reviewed, albeit with a 15-yard penalty.

One of the reasons for the proposed change is what happened on Thanksgiving when Detroit Lions Coach Jim Schwartz challenged what officials ruled was an 81-yard scoring run by Houston's Justin Forsett.

Because all scoring plays are automatically reviewed, Schwartz negated use of replay when he threw the red challenge flag. Even though Forsett was clearly down by contact during the run, the touchdown stood and the Texans won in overtime.

The new proposal is designed to ensure the play is reviewed and the right call is made. However, the coach making the illegal challenge will draw a 15-yard penalty. Challenges that are deemed illegal are when a team is out of timeouts, has used all its challenges, is in the final two minutes of a half or overtime and on scoring plays or turnovers.

If a coach would challenge in the final two minutes of a half or overtime, he will lose a timeout.

"I think, from our position, we feel there are probably too many replays at this point in our game," Rooney said. "I am not sure if I am expecting any change in that regard at this meeting, but I think we will at least try to start a conversation about whether we are getting to the point that we are having too many replays."

Maybe the most controversial new rule will be the one that would prohibit a running back from using the crown of his helmet outside the tackle box -- a proposal that could be targeted at Peterson, Minnesota's record-setting running back.

Under the new rule -- one of three safety-related proposals put before the owners -- the runner would be penalized 15 yards for forcible contact with the crown of his helmet when he chooses to lower his head outside the tackle box. Incidental contact inside the tackle box will still result in no foul.

"We really think the time has come that we need to address the situation in space when a runner or a tackler has a choice as to how they are going to approach the opponent," McKay said. "We are trying to protect the runner or the tackler from himself in that instance."

Another player-safety proposal is the elimination of peel-back blocks by an offensive player inside the tackle box. The proposal is to protect defensive ends who are pursuing the ball from the back side.

"We preferably would support going a little further in cut-back blocks, but that is not being proposed at this point by the committee," Rooney said.

Read more: http://www.post-gazette.com/stories/sports/steelers/nfl-owners-may-end-tuck-rule-amend-replays-679664/#ixzz2NnlePdLG

Lady Steel
03-17-2013, 11:57 AM
Maybe the most controversial new rule will be the one that would prohibit a running back from using the crown of his helmet outside the tackle box -- a proposal that could be targeted at Peterson, Minnesota's record-setting running back.

Under the new rule -- one of three safety-related proposals put before the owners -- the runner would be penalized 15 yards for forcible contact with the crown of his helmet when he chooses to lower his head outside the tackle box. Incidental contact inside the tackle box will still result in no foul.

"We really think the time has come that we need to address the situation in space when a runner or a tackler has a choice as to how they are going to approach the opponent," McKay said. "We are trying to protect the runner or the tackler from himself in that instance."


Emmitt Smith Says New Safety Rule Means NFL Has “Lost Its Mind”

DALLAS (105.3 THE FAN) - The NFL is changing its rules to prevent ball-carriers from initiating contact with the crown of the helmet.

It’s an attempt to make the game safer – but the league’s all-time leading rusher, Emmitt Smith, thinks the NFL should have its own head examined.

“If I’m a running back and I’m running into a linebacker, you’re telling me I have to keep my head up so he can take my chin off?’’ Smith said Thursday in an exclusive interview with Dallas radio station 105.3 The Fan. “You’ve absolutely lost your mind.’’

The NFL’s rules-making competition committee will propose this change to NFL owners at league meetings next week. At least 24 votes from 32 owners are required for passage.

“As a running back, it’s almost impossible (to not lower your head),’’ said the Dallas Cowboys legend. “The first thing you do is get behind your shoulder pads. That means you’re leaning forward and the first part of contact that’s going to take place is your head, regardless.

“I disagree with the rule altogether. It doesn’t make any sense for that position. It sounds like it’s been made up by people who have never played the game of football.’’


http://dfw.cbslocal.com/2013/03/14/emmitt-smith-says-new-safety-rule-means-nfl-has-lost-its-mind/

jacobo
03-17-2013, 12:33 PM
...

what are they doing to my game

The_Joker
03-17-2013, 02:18 PM
No

Just fucking no

No

MACH1
03-17-2013, 02:27 PM
...

what are they doing to my game

It's called pu$$yfying.

CrickRat23
03-17-2013, 06:20 PM
I agree with MACH1. Soon the game will almost be unwatchable with all these rules about how you can hit and be hit. Man up and play the game like it was ment to be played. The players know the risk they are taking when they sign up to play ( a supposedly ) violent game.

mikegrimey
03-17-2013, 06:38 PM
I like getting rid of the tuck rule.

Not a fan of removing the Schwartz rule personally, I think it adds a mental element to the game and gives coaches reasons not to be reactionary oafs (like Sxhwartz).

The last one I think will be just weird and might lead to worse injuries to RBs. Keeping your head up is a sure fire way to get laid out in the football field.

kan_t
03-17-2013, 11:55 PM
So the runners can't lower their heads in open field but the tacklers can use theirs head to hit the runners. Sounds right.

lloydwoodson
03-18-2013, 12:54 AM
I didn't even read the article. The tuck rule is garbage.

Simple physics: objects in motion stay in motion.

If a quarterback is throwing and gets hit and the ball goes backwards it is a fumble because his arm was going backwards.

If a quarterback is throwing and the ball goes forwards it is an incomplete pass because his arm was going forwards.

That is how it should be.

4xSBChamps
03-18-2013, 11:14 AM
...

what are they doing to my game

I posted the following over 2 years ago, and nothing that has been done has changed my mind about Ms. Goodell

by age 7, I was going to the old Black & Gold scrimmage at McKee Stadium in Jeannette, Pa., attending 2-3 days of camp per-week at St. Vincent's during my dad's summer vacation (back-then, we were lucky to get 100 people showing-up at camp), and getting a ride from our home in Greensburg whenever possible when he was working, or convincing one of the guys' mothers to take us

the League built it's reputation on being as physical game, played by hard men, and didn't shy away from publicity like
'The Violent World of Sam Huff':

http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y272/Glensgages/football/YATittlelastgameatPittStadium.jpg

the classic picture of Chuck Bednarik standing over a fallen & unconscious Frank Gifford epitomized the game of the 1960's

http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y272/Glensgages/football/ChuckBednarikstandsoverFrankGifford.jpg

as that decade wore-on, 30 minute pre-game shows on CBS (NFL) & NBC (AFL) glamorized the images of contact & hitting ~ long-before ESPN, a little-known entity called 'NFL Films' began making weekly 1/2-hour clips, highlighting the previous weeks action, further cementing the physicality of the game:
vicious hits were shown in slow-motion, mouth-pieces & chin-straps flying, further enticing viewers to watch the League

http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y272/Glensgages/football/MikeCurtiscreamsRomanGabriel.jpg

soon, Dick Butkus was speaking about 'running-back losing their heads', signs were hung at stadiums reading 'KILL, BUBBA, KILL', and nick-names like 'the Purple People Eaters' and 'Fearsome Foursome' became known to many Americans enamored with professisonal football:
the NFL used this publicity to surpass baseball as 'America's Game' without batting an eye

as the 1970's dawned, the League, fresh from the AFL/NFL merger, consolidated it's power, and it's publicity continued to grow with teams featuring names like the 'Steel Curtain' and the 'Doomsday Defense', and players called 'the Assassin', and 'Dracula in Cleats', with no-qualms about it's violent nature:
indeed, the networks looked-forward to the annual Raider-Steeler blood-lettings in the playoffs, because they generated record ratings & revenue

in the late 1970's (as it had been for 40 years), the game was based-on running the football, and playing defense, yet despite having become 'America's game', the League & owners decided that if they could increase scoring, they could make the game even-more palatable to the viewing-public (evidence that the college-boy / scumbags couldn't, or wouldn't, enjoy a hard-fought 16-10 game):
what had been holding (i.e. - open-hand pas-blocking) became legal, defenders couldn't play bump-n-run pass-coverage, sneezing in the general direction of the QB became ver-boten, and while scoring escalated, the game became a shell of it's former self

Rozelle passed the torch to Tagliabue, who gave-way to Nancy-boy Goodell, leading to what we have today, an over-hyped, over-commercialized 'fantasy'-driven version of basketball-on-grass:
the game's history & records have become bastardized because of these rule-changes, and despite Rogita's claims he is concerned about players' safety, he intends to increase the schedule from 16 to 18 games

I last spoke with my dad the day of the San Diego 1st round playoff game in January 2009, trying to reconcile after 7+ years of silence between us, as he knew that his time was short:
during the game, he said he loved the Steelers because 'they are the only team that still plays smash-mouth football', but I had to correct him, stating 'by TODAY'S standards, they play smash-mouth football, but this is still pass-n-tab... the League doesn't WANT smash-mouth footbal to be played anymore!', so during the remainder of that game, we discussed how-much the game had changed in the previous 40+ years, and before we said our final goodbyes, he frowned & admitted 'you are correct, this isn't the game we began watching many years ago'

he hung-on to watch that Super Bowl victory against the Red-Robins, and passed-away the next day, content he'd seen his Steelers win another Championship, but I think he realized the game had changed, and not-necessarily for the better

today, we have players fined $75,000 for tackles that don't draw penalty flags, while players who tear-off opponents' helmets and throw punches, which has NOTHING to do with the game of football, get 1/3 of that fine:
which incident gave the NFL a black eye to the general public?

tell me again how Rogita is worried about the 'League's image'?????

I haven't 'given-up' on the Steelers, per-se... I've grown tired of the League, and the game they have turned it into

... and this is why it isn't MY game any-more

http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y272/Glensgages/hockey%20pictures/2009Penguinson-icewithStanleyCup.png

wwhickok
03-19-2013, 07:35 AM
Im all for getting rid of the tuck rule. The lower helmet penalty against runners is stupid as hell. Its in fact, thr stupidest damn thing they have ever suggested.

Vis
03-19-2013, 01:52 PM
The other side of this is the Mike Webster story.

I don't think the RB rule helps but I do think changes are needed. We can't go back in time to when we didn't understand the damage being done. Football players aren't gladiators to die for our bloodlust.

Vis
03-19-2013, 08:24 PM
https://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/527809_600546426640025_771710385_n.jpg